On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 09:48:51AM +0000, Liam Girdwood wrote:
On Tue, 2016-03-15 at 09:55 +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote:
Shouldn't we use whatever we use to figure out which firmware to load rather than the firmware name? Someone might do something like try to replace one firmware with another and get everything confused.
This is not to load FW for our use case, the FW name is hard coded in
It's not for loading, it's because the firmware name we requested may not be the firmware that actually got loaded.
driver tables. We do have several FWs for the BYT driver that all have different capabilities. Userspace could set the correct config for each FW if it knew the FW that was being used.
Is the firmware configuration sufficiently reusable between boards or could that just be figured out in userspace?
The short name is something between them. The alsa-lib USB-audio config file refers to the short name because the driver doesn't provide a unique id for driver_name for various workarounds. But it should be considered as an exception. Ideally, driver_name should be unique enough for each different configuration.
So IIUC this would mean ?
- short name is optional, but could be board name.
I'd not make it optional, the long names tend to be on the verbose side so applications do seem to use the short name for user rendering purposes.